5 ms·

Honestly I'm only starting to accept how stupid it is that we call datacenter services "cloud" now, I just can't bear the stupidity of calling running script on

• FractalHQ 5y ago
  Considering the alternative would be running your own server, what would you suggest “serverless” be called instead?
  • slver 5y ago
    People have been running on “someone else’s server” for decades. So, no, that’s not the alternative.
    • MikeDelta 5y ago
      All code must run on a processor somewhere, and if it's not your server it is someone else's server. I also have issues with the term serverless. However, the term is generally accepted for cloud services where you run code on someone else's server. It is a product you can use. I would be greatly disappointed if there are developers who think serverless code runs on air.
• circularfoyers 5y ago
  I think it makes sense when it's simply describing that you don't manage the server.
• lootsauce 5y ago
  Having felt the pain of maintaining my own instances, deploying, updating, dockering, when all I wanted was to have a function deployed out there somewhere I was stoked when serverless functions were announced at AWS Re:Invent. I never felt it was a stupid name because I was done with the servers and all their annoyances. FaaS (functions as a Service) could be interpreted as a dumb name with the same logic we’ve been executing functions the whole time!